Method and system for multi-mode coverage for an autonomous robot

ABSTRACT

A control system for a mobile robot ( 10 ) is provided to effectively cover a given area by operating in a plurality of modes, including an obstacle following mode ( 51 ) and a random bounce mode ( 49 ). In other embodiments, spot coverage, such as spiraling ( 45 ), or other modes are also used to increase effectiveness. In addition, a behavior based architecture is used to implement the control system, and various escape behaviors are used to ensure full coverage.

This application for United States Patent is a continuation of, andclaims priority from, U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/893,762 filedMay 14, 2013, entitled Multi-Mode Coverage for an Autonomous Robot,which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/609,124filed Oct. 30, 2009, entitled Multi-Mode Coverage for an AutonomousRobot, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.11/671,305 filed Feb. 5, 2007, entitled Multi-Mode Coverage for anAutonomous Robot, which is a continuation of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 10/839,374 filed May 5, 2004, entitled Multi-Mode Coverage foran Autonomous Robot, which is a continuation of U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 10/187,851 filed Jun. 12, 2002, entitled Method and System forMulti-Mode Coverage for an Autonomous Robot, and related to U.S.Provisional Application for Patent Ser. No. 60/297,718 filed Jun. 12,2001. The disclosures of these prior applications are considered part ofthe disclosure of this application and are hereby incorporated byreference in their entireties.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates generally to autonomous vehicles or robots, andmore specifically to methods and mobile robotic devices for covering aspecific area as might be required of, or used as, robotic cleaners lawnmowers.

DESCRIPTION OF PRIOR ART

For purposes of this description, examples will focus on the problemsfaced in the prior art as related to robotic cleaning (e.g., dusting,buffing, sweeping, scrubbing, dry mopping or vacuuming). The claimedinvention, however, is limited only by the claims themselves, and one ofskill in the art will recognize the myriad of uses for the presentinvention beyond indoor, domestic cleaning.

Robotic engineers have long worked on developing an effective method ofautonomous cleaning. By way of introduction, the performance of cleaningrobots should concentrate on three measures of success: coverage,cleaning rate and perceived effectiveness. Coverage is the percentage ofthe available space visited by the robot during a fixed cleaning time,and ideally, a robot cleaner would provide 100 percent coverage given aninfinite run time. Unfortunately, designs in the prior art often leaveportions of the area uncovered regardless of the amount of time thedevice is allowed to complete its tasks. Failure to achieve completecoverage can result from mechanical limitations—e.g., the size and shapeof the robot may prevent it from reaching certain areas—or the robot maybecome trapped, unable to vary its control to escape. Failure to achievecomplete coverage can also result from an inadequate coverage algorithm.The coverage algorithm is the set of instructions used by the robot tocontrol its movement. For the purposes of the present invention,coverage is discussed as a percentage of the available area visited bythe robot during a finite cleaning time. Due to mechanical and/oralgorithmic limitations, certain areas within the available space may besystematically neglected. Such systematic neglect is a significantlimitation in the prior art.

A second measure of a cleaning robot's performance is the cleaning rategiven in units of area cleaned per unit time. Cleaning rate refers tothe rate at which the area of cleaned floor increases; coverage raterefers to the rate at which the robot covers the floor regardless ofwhether the floor was previously clean or dirty. If the velocity of therobot is v and the width of the robot's cleaning mechanism (also calledwork width) is w then the robot's coverage rate is simply wv, but itscleaning rate may be drastically lower.

A robot that moves in a purely randomly fashion in a closed environmenthas a cleaning rate that decreases relative to the robot's coverage rateas a function of time. This is because the longer the robot operates themore likely it is to revisit already cleaned areas. The optimal designhas a cleaning rate equivalent to the coverage rate, thus minimizingunnecessary repeated cleanings of the same spot. In other words, theratio of cleaning rate to coverage rate is a measure of efficiency andan optimal cleaning rate would mean coverage of the greatest percentageof the designated area with the minimum number of cumulative orredundant passes over an area already cleaned.

A third metric of cleaning robot performance is the perceivedeffectiveness of the robot. This measure is ignored in the prior art.Deliberate movement and certain patterned movement is favored as userswill perceive a robot that contains deliberate movement as moreeffective.

While coverage, cleaning rate and perceived effectiveness are theperformance criteria discussed herein, a preferred embodiment of thepresent invention also takes into account the ease of use in rooms of avariety of shapes and sizes (containing a variety of unknown obstacles)and the cost of the robotic components. Other design criteria may alsoinfluence the design, for example the need for collision avoidance andappropriate response to other hazards.

As described in detail in Jones, Flynn & Seiger, Mobile Robots:Inspiration to Implementation second edition, 1999, A K Peters, Ltd.,and elsewhere, numerous attempts have been made to build vacuuming andcleaning robots. Each of these robots has faced a similar challenge: howto efficiently cover the designated area given limited energy reserves.

We refer to maximally efficient cleaning, where the cleaning rate equalsthe coverage rate, as deterministic cleaning. As shown in FIG. 1A, arobot 1 following a deterministic path moves in such a way as tocompletely cover the area 2 while avoiding all redundant cleaning.Deterministic cleaning requires that the robot know both where it is andwhere it has been; this in turn requires a positioning system. Such apositioning system—a positioning system suitably accurate to enabledeterministic cleaning might rely on scanning laser rangers, ultrasonictransducers, carrier phase differential GPS, or other methods—can beprohibitively expensive and involve user set-up specific to theparticular room geometries. Also, methods that rely on globalpositioning are typically incapacitated by the failure of any part ofthe positioning system.

One example of using highly sophisticated (and expensive) sensortechnologies to create deterministic cleaning is the RoboScrub devicebuilt by Denning Mobile Robotics and Windsor Industries, which usedsonar, infrared detectors, bump sensors and high-precision lasernavigation. RoboScrub's navigation system required attaching large barcode targets at various positions in the room. The requirement thatRoboScrub be able to see at least four targets simultaneously was asignificant operational problem. RoboScrub, therefore, was limited tocleaning large open areas.

Another example, RoboKent, a robot built by the Kent Corporation,follows a global positioning strategy similar to RobotScrub. RoboKentdispenses with RobotScrub's more expensive laser positioning system buthaving done so RoboKent must restrict itself only to areas with a simplerectangular geometry, e.g. long hallways. In these more constrainedregions, position correction by sonar ranging measurements issufficient. Other deterministic cleaning systems are described, forexample, in U.S. Pat. No. 4,119,900 (Kremnitz), U.S. Pat. No. 4,700,427(Knepper), U.S. Pat. No. 5,353,224 (Lee et al.), U.S. Pat. No. 5,537,017(Feiten et al.) U.S. Pat. No. 5,548,511 (Bancroft), U.S. Pat. No.5,650,702 (Azumi).

Because of the limitations and difficulties of deterministic cleaning,some robots have relied on pseudo-deterministic schemes. One method ofproviding pseudo-deterministic cleaning is an autonomous navigationmethod known as dead reckoning. Dead reckoning consists of measuring theprecise rotation of each robot drive wheel (using for example opticalshaft encoders). The robot can then calculate its expected position inthe environment given a known starting point and orientation. Oneproblem with this technique is wheel slippage. If slippage occurs, theencoder on that wheel registers a wheel rotation even though that wheelis not driving the robot relative to the ground. As shown in FIG. 1B, asthe robot 1 navigates about the room, these drive wheel slippage errorsaccumulate making this type of system unreliable for runs of anysubstantial duration. (The path no longer consists of tightly packedrows, as compared to the deterministic coverage shown in FIG. 1A.) Theresult of reliance on dead reckoning is intractable systematic neglect;in other words, areas of the floor are not cleaned.

One example of a pseudo-deterministic a system is the Cye robot fromProbotics, Inc. Cye depends exclusively on dead reckoning and thereforetakes heroic measures to maximize the performance of its dead reckoningsystem. Cye must begin at a user-installed physical registration spot ina known location where the robot fixes its position and orientation. Cyethen keeps track of position as it moves away from that spot. As Cyemoves, uncertainty in its position and orientation increase. Cye mustmake certain to return to a calibration spot before this error grows solarge that it will be unlikely to locate a calibration spot. If acalibration spot is moved or blocked or if excessive wheel slippageoccurs then Cye can become lost (possibly without realizing that it islost). Thus Cye is suitable for use only in relatively small benignenvironments. Other examples of this approach are disclosed in U.S. Pat.No. 5,109,566 (Kobayashi et al.) and U.S. Pat. No. 6,255,793 (Peless etal.).

Another approach to robotic cleaning is purely random motion. As shownin FIG. 1C, in a typical room without obstacles, a random movementalgorithm will provide acceptable coverage given significant cleaningtime. Compared to a robot with a deterministic algorithm, a randomcleaning robot must operate for a longer time to achieve acceptablecoverage. To have high confidence that the random-motion robot hascleaned 98% of an obstacle-free room, the random motion robot must runapproximately five times as long as a deterministic robot with the samecleaning mechanism moving at the same speed.

The coverage limitations of a random algorithm can be seen in FIG. 1D.An obstacle 5 in the room can create the effect of segmenting the roominto a collection of chambers. The coverage over time of a randomalgorithm robot in such a room is analogous to the time density of gasreleased in one chamber of a confined volume. Initially, the density ofgas is highest in the chamber where it is released and lowest in moredistant chambers. Similarly the robot is most likely to thoroughly cleanthe chamber where it starts, rather than more distant chambers, early inthe process. Given enough time a gas reaches equilibrium with equaldensity in all chambers. Likewise given time, the robot would clean allareas thoroughly. The limitations of practical power supplies, however,usually guarantee that the robot will have insufficient time to cleanall areas of a space cluttered with obstacles. We refer to thisphenomenon as the robot diffusion problem.

As discussed, the commercially available prior art has not been able toproduce an effective coverage algorithm for an area of unknown geometry.As noted above, the prior art either has relied on sophisticated systemsof markers or beacons or has limited the utility of the robot to roomswith simple rectangular geometries. Attempts to use pseudo deterministiccontrol algorithms can leave areas of the space systematicallyneglected.

OBJECTS AND ADVANTAGES

It is an object of the present invention to provide a system and methodto allow a mobile robot to operate in a plurality of modes in order toeffectively cover an area.

It is an object of the present invention to provide a mobile robot, withat least one sensor, to operate in a number of modes includingspot-coverage, obstacle following and bounce.

It is a further object of the invention to provide a mobile robot thatalternates between obstacle following and bounce mode to ensurecoverage.

It is an object of the invention to return to spot-coverage after therobot has traveled a pre-determined distance.

It is an object of the invention to provide a mobile robot able to trackthe average distance between obstacles and use the average distance asan input to alternate between operational modes.

It is yet another object of the invention to optimize the distance therobot travels in an obstacle following mode as a function of thefrequency of obstacle following and the work width of the robot, and toprovide a minimum and maximum distance for operating in obstaclefollowing mode.

It is an object of a preferred embodiment of the invention to use acontrol system for a mobile robot with an operational system programable to run a plurality of behaviors and using an arbiter to selectwhich behavior is given control over the robot.

It is still another object of the invention to incorporate variousescape programs or behavior to allow the robot to avoid becoming stuck.

Finally, it is an object of the invention to provide one or more methodsfor controlling a mobile robot to benefit from the various objects andadvantages disclosed herein.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

These and further features of the present invention will be apparentwith reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:

FIGS. 1A-D illustrate coverage patterns of various robots in the priorart;

FIG. 2 is a top-view schematic representation of the basic components ofa mobile robot used in a preferred embodiment of the invention;

FIG. 3 demonstrates a hardware block diagram of the robot shown in FIG.2;

FIG. 4A is a diagram showing a method of determining the angle at whichthe robot encounters an obstacle; FIG. 4B is a diagram showing theorientation of a preferred embodiment of the robot control system;

FIG. 5 is a schematic representation of the operational modes of theinstant invention;

FIG. 6A is a schematic representation of the coverage pattern for apreferred embodiment of SPIRAL behavior; FIG. 6B is a schematicrepresentation of the coverage pattern for an alternative embodiment ofSPIRAL behavior; FIG. 6C is a schematic representation of the coveragepattern for yet another alternative embodiment of SPIRAL behavior;

FIG. 7 is a flow-chart illustration of the spot-coverage algorithm of apreferred embodiment of the invention;

FIGS. 8A & 8B are schematic representations of the coverage pattern fora preferred embodiment of operation in obstacle following mode;

FIG. 8C is a schematic illustration of the termination of the obstaclefollowing mode when an obstacle is encountered after the mobile robothas traveled a minimum distance. FIG. 8D is a schematic illustration ofthe termination of the obstacle following mode after the mobile robothas traveled a maximum distance.

FIG. 9A is a flow-chart illustration of the obstacle following algorithmof a preferred embodiment of the invention; FIG. 9B is a flow-chartillustration of a preferred algorithm for determining when to exitobstacle following mode.

FIG. 10 is a schematic representation of the coverage pattern for apreferred embodiment of BOUNCE behavior;

FIG. 11 is a flow-chart illustration of the room coverage algorithm of apreferred embodiment of the invention;

FIGS. 12A & 12B are flow-chart illustrations of an exemplary escapebehavior;

FIG. 13A is a schematic representation of the coverage pattern of amobile robot with only a single operational mode; FIG. 13B is aschematic representation of the coverage pattern for a preferredembodiment of the instant invention using obstacle following and roomcoverage modes; and

FIG. 14 is a schematic representation of the coverage pattern for apreferred embodiment of the instant invention using spot-coverage,obstacle following and room coverage modes.

DESCRIPTION OF INVENTION

In the present invention, a mobile robot is designed to provide maximumcoverage at an effective coverage rate in a room of unknown geometry. Inaddition, the perceived effectiveness of the robot is enhanced by theinclusion of patterned or deliberate motion. In addition, in a preferredembodiment, effective coverage requires a control system able to preventthe robot from becoming immobilized in an unknown environment.

While the physical structures of mobile robots are known in the art, thecomponents of a preferred, exemplary embodiment of the present inventionis described herein. A preferred embodiment of the present invention isa substantially circular robotic sweeper containing certain features. Asshown in FIG. 2, for example, the mobile robot 10 of a preferredembodiment includes a chassis 11 supporting mechanical and electricalcomponents. These components include various sensors, including two bumpsensors 12 & 13 located in the forward portion of the robot, four cliffsensors 14 located on the robot shell 15, and a wall following sensor 16mounted on the robot shell 15. In other embodiments, as few as onesensor may be used in the robot. One of skill in the art will recognizethat the sensor(s) may be of a variety of types including sonar,tactile, electromagnetic, capacitive, etc. Because of cost restraints, apreferred embodiment of the present invention uses bump (tactile)sensors 12 & 13 and reflective IR proximity sensors for the cliffsensors 14 and the wall-following sensor 16. Details of the IR sensorsare described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/768,773, whichdisclosure is hereby incorporated by reference.

A preferred embodiment of the robot also contains two wheels 20, motors21 for driving the wheels independently, an inexpensive low-endmicrocontroller 22, and a rechargeable battery 23 or other power sourceknown in the art. These components are well known in the art and are notdiscussed in detail herein. The robotic cleaning device 10 furtherincludes one or more cleaning heads 30. The cleaning head might containa vacuum cleaner, various brushes, sponges, mops, electrostatic clothsor a combination of various cleaning elements. The embodiment shown inFIG. 2 also includes a side brush 32.

As mentioned above, a preferred embodiment of the robotic cleaningdevice 10 comprises an outer shell 15 defining a dominant side,non-dominant side, and a front portion of the robot 10. The dominantside of the robot is the side that is kept near or in contact with anobject (or obstacle) when the robot cleans the area adjacent to thatobject (or obstacle). In a preferred embodiment, as shown in FIG. 1, thedominant side of the robot 10 is the right-hand side relative to theprimary direction of travel, although in other embodiments the dominantside may be the left-hand side. In still other embodiments, the robotmay be symmetric and thereby does not need a dominant side; however, ina preferred embodiment, a dominant side is chosen for reasons of cost.The primary direction of travel is as shown in FIG. 2 by arrow 40.

In a preferred embodiment, two bump sensors 12 & 13 are located forwardof the wheels 20 relative to the direction of forward movement, shown byarrow 40. One bump sensor 13 is located on the dominant side of therobot 10 and the other bump sensor 12 is located on the non-dominantside of the robot 10. When both of these bump sensors 12 & 13 areactivated simultaneously, the robot 10 recognizes an obstacle in thefront position. In other embodiments, more or fewer individual bumpsensors can be used. Likewise, any number of bump sensors can be used todivide the device into any number of radial segments. While in apreferred embodiment the bump sensors 12 & 13 are IR break beam sensorsactivated by contact between the robot 10 and an obstacle, other typesof sensors can be used, including mechanical switches and capacitivesensors that detect the capacitance of objects touching the robot orbetween two metal plates in the bumper that are compressed on contact.Non-contact sensors, which allow the robot to sense proximity to objectswithout physically touching the object, such as capacitive sensors or acurtain of IR light, can also be used.

It is useful to have a sensor or sensors that are not only able to tellif a surface has been contacted (or is nearby), but also the anglerelative to the robot at which the contact was made. In the case of apreferred embodiment, the robot is able to calculate the time betweenthe activation of the right and left bump switches 12 & 13, if both areactivated. The robot is then able to estimate the angle at which contactwas made. In a preferred embodiment shown in FIG. 4A, the bump sensorcomprises a single mechanical bumper 44 at the front of the robot withsensors 42 & 43 substantially at the two ends of the bumper that sensethe movement of the bumper. When the bumper is compressed, the timingbetween the sensor events is used to calculate the approximate angle atwhich the robot contacted the obstacle. When the bumper is compressedfrom the right side, the right bump sensor detects the bump first,followed by the left bump sensor, due to the compliance of the bumperand the bump detector geometry. This way, the bump angle can beapproximated with only two bump sensors.

For example, in FIG. 4A, bump sensors 42 & 43 are able to divide theforward portion of the robot into six regions (I-VI). When a bump sensoris activated, the robot calculates the time before the other sensor isactivated (if at all). For example, when the right bump sensor 43 isactivated, the robot measures the time (t) before the left bump sensor42 is activated. If t is less than t₁, then the robot assumes contactoccurred in region IV. If t is greater than or equal to t₁, and lessthan t₂, then the robot assumes contact was made in region V. If t isgreater than or equal to t₂ (including the case of where the left bumpsensor 42 is not activated at all within the time monitored), then therobot assumes the contact occurred in region VI. If the bump sensors areactivated simultaneously, the robot assumes the contact was made fromstraight ahead. This method can be used the divide the bumper into anarbitrarily large number of regions (for greater precision) depending onof the timing used and geometry of the bumper. As an extension, threesensors can be used to calculate the bump angle in three dimensionsinstead of just two dimensions as in the preceding example.

A preferred embodiment also contains a wall-following or wall-detectingsensor 16 mounted on the dominant side of the robot 10. In a preferredembodiment, the wall following sensor is an IR sensor composed of anemitter and detector pair collimated so that a finite volume ofintersection occurs at the expected position of the wall. This focuspoint is approximately three inches ahead of the drive wheel in thedirection of robot forward motion. The radial range of wall detection isabout 0.75 inches.

A preferred embodiment also contains any number of IR cliff sensors 14that prevent the device from tumbling over stairs or other verticaldrops. These cliff sensors are of a construction similar to that of thewall following sensor but directed to observe the floor rather than awall. As an additional safety and sensing measure, the robot 10 includesa wheel-drop sensor that is able to detect if one or more wheels isunsupported by the floor. This wheel-drop sensor can therefore detectnot only cliffs but also various obstacles upon which the robot is ableto drive, such as lamps bases, high floor transitions, piles of cords,etc.

Other embodiments may use other known sensors or combinations ofsensors.

FIG. 3 shows a hardware block diagram of the controller and robot of apreferred embodiment of the invention. In a preferred embodiment, aWinbond W78XXX series processor is used. It is a microcontrollercompatible with the MCS-51 family with 36 general purpose I/O ports, 256bytes of RAM and 16K of ROM. It is clocked at 40 MHz which is divideddown for a processor speed of 3.3 MHz. It has two timers which are usedfor triggering interrupts used to process sensors and generate outputsignals as well as a watchdog timer. The lowest bits of the fast timerare also used as approximate random numbers where needed in thebehaviors. There are also two external interrupts which are used tocapture the encoder inputs from the two drive wheels. The processor alsohas a UART which is used for testing and debugging the robot controlprogram.

The I/O ports of the microprocessor are connected to the sensors andmotors of the robot and are the interface connecting it to the internalstate of the robot and its environment. For example, the wheel dropsensors are connected to an input port and the brush motor PWM signal isgenerated on an output port. The ROM on the microprocessor is used tostore the coverage and control program for the robot. This includes thebehaviors (discussed below), sensor processing algorithms and signalgeneration. The RAM is used to store the active state of the robot, suchas the average bump distance, run time and distance, and the ID of thebehavior in control and its current motor commands.

For purposes of understanding the movement of the robotic device, FIG.4B shows the orientation of the robot 10 centered about the x and y axesin a coordinate plane; this coordinate system is attached to the robot.The directional movement of the robot 10 can be understood to be theradius at which the robot 10 will move. In order to rapidly turn awayfrom the wall 100, the robot 10 should set a positive, small value of r(r₃ in FIG. 4B); in order to rapidly turn toward the wall, the robotshould set a negative, small value of r (r₁ in FIG. 4B). On the otherhand, to make slight turns, the robot should set larger absolute valuesfor r—positive values to move left (i.e. away from the wall, r₄ in FIG.4B) and negative values to move right (i.e. toward the wall, (r₂ in FIG.4B). This coordinate scheme is used in the examples of control discussedbelow. The microcontroller 22 controlling differential speed at whichthe individual wheel motors 21 are run, determines the turning radius.

Also, in certain embodiments, the robot may include one or more userinputs. For example, as shown in FIG. 2, a preferred embodiment includesthree simple buttons 33 that allow the user to input the approximatesize of the surface to be covered. In a preferred embodiment, thesebuttons labeled “small,” “medium,” and “large” correspond respectivelyto rooms of 11.1, 20.8 and 27.9 square meters.

As mentioned above, the exemplary robot is a preferred embodiment forpracticing the instant invention, and one of skill in the art is able tochoose from elements known in the art to design a robot for a particularpurpose. Examples of suitable designs include those described in thefollowing U.S. Pat. No. 4,306,329 (Yokoi), U.S. Pat. No. 5,109,566(Kobayashi at al.), U.S. Pat. No. 5,293,955 (Lee), U.S. Pat. No.5,369,347 (Yoo), U.S. Pat. No. 5,440,216 (Kim), U.S. Pat. No. 5,534,762(Kim), U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,261 (Kawakami et al), U.S. Pat. No. 5,634,237(Paranjpe), U.S. Pat. No. 5,781,960 (Kilstrom at al.), U.S. Pat. No.5,787,545 (Colens), U.S. Pat. No. 5,815,880 (Nakanishi), U.S. Pat. No.5,839,156 (Park at al.), U.S. Pat. No. 5,926,909 (McGee), U.S. Pat. No.6,038,501 (Kawakami) U.S. Pat. No. 6,076,226 (Reed), all of which arehereby incorporated by reference.

FIG. 5 shows a simple block representation of the various operationalmodes of a device. In a preferred embodiment, and by way of exampleonly, operational modes may include spot cleaning (where the user orrobot designates a specific region for cleaning), edge cleaning, androom cleaning. Each operational mode comprises complex combinations ofinstructions and/or internal behaviors, discussed below. Thesecomplexities, however, are generally hidden from the user. In oneembodiment, the user can select the particular operational mode by usingan input element, for example, a selector switch or push button. Inother preferred embodiments, as described below, the robot is able toautonomously cycle through the operational modes.

The coverage robot of the instant invention uses these variousoperational modes to effectively cover the area. While one of skill inthe art may implement these various operational modes in a variety ofknown architectures, a preferred embodiment relies on behavior control.Here, behaviors are simply layers of control systems that all run inparallel. The microcontroller 22 then runs a prioritized arbitrationscheme to resolve the dominant behavior for a given scenario. Adescription of behavior control can be found in Mobile Robots, supra,the text of which is hereby incorporated by reference.

In other words, in a preferred embodiment, the robot's microprocessorand control software run a number of behaviors simultaneously. Dependingon the situation, control of the robot will be given to one or morevarious behaviors. For purposes of detailing the preferred operation ofthe present invention, the behaviors will be described as (1) coveragebehaviors, (2) escape behaviors or (3) user/safety behaviors. Coveragebehaviors are primarily designed to allow the robot to perform itscoverage operation in an efficient manner. Escape behaviors are specialbehaviors that are given priority when one or more sensor inputs suggestthat the robot may not be operating freely. As a convention for thisspecification, behaviors discussed below are written in all capitalletters.

1. Coverage Behaviors

FIGS. 6-14 show the details of each of the preferred operational modes:Spot Coverage, Wall Follow (or Obstacle Follow) and Room Coverage.

Operational Mode: Spot Coverage

Spot coverage or, for example, spot cleaning allows the user to clean anisolated dirty area. The user places the robot 10 on the floor near thecenter of the area (see reference numeral 40 in FIGS. 6A, 6B) thatrequires cleaning and selects the spot-cleaning operational mode. Therobot then moves in such a way that the immediate area within, forexample, a defined radius, is brought into contact with the cleaninghead 30 or side brush 32 of the robot.

In a preferred embodiment, the method of achieving spot cleaning is acontrol algorithm providing outward spiral movement, or SPIRAL behavior,as shown in FIG. 6A. In general, spiral movement is generated byincreasing the turning radius as a function of time. In a preferredembodiment, the robot 10 begins its spiral in a counter-clockwisedirection, marked in FIG. 6A by movement line 45, in order to keep thedominant side on the outward, leading-edge of the spiral. In anotherembodiment, shown in FIG. 6B, spiral movement of the robot 10 isgenerated inward such that the radius of the turns continues todecrease. The inward spiral is shown as movement line 45 in FIG. 6B. Itis not necessary, however, to keep the dominant side of the robot on theoutside during spiral motion.

The method of spot cleaning used in a preferred embodiment—outwardspiraling—is set forth in FIG. 7. Once the spiraling is initiated (step201) and the value of r is set at its minimum, positive value (whichwill produce the tightest possible counterclockwise turn), the spiralingbehavior recalculates the value of r as a function of •, where •represents the angular turning since the initiation of the spiralingbehavior (step 210). By using the equation r=a•, where a is a constantcoefficient, the tightness or desired overlap of the spiral can becontrolled. (Note that • is not normalized to 2 •). The value of a canbe chosen by the equation

${a = \frac{d}{2 \cdot}};$where d is the distance between two consecutive passes of the spiral.For effective cleaning, a value for d should be chosen that is less thanthe width of the cleaning mechanism 30. In a preferred embodiment, avalue of d is selected that is between one-half and two-thirds of thewidth of the cleaning head 30.

In other embodiments, the robot tracks its total distance traveled inspiral mode. The spiral will deteriorate after some distance, i.e. thecenterpoint of the spiral motion will tend to drift over time due tosurface dependant wheel slippage and/or inaccuracies in the spiralapproximation algorithm and calculation precision. In certainembodiments, therefore, the robot may exit spiral mode after the robothas traveled a specific distance (“maximum spiral distance”), such as6.3 or 18.5 meters (step 240). In a preferred embodiment, the robot usesmultiple maximum spiral distances depending on whether the robot isperforming an initial spiral or a later spiral. If the maximum spiraldistance is reached without a bump, the robot gives control to adifferent behavior, and the robot, for example, then continues to movein a predominately straight line. (In a preferred embodiment, a STRAIGHTLINE behavior is a low priority, default behavior that propels the robotin an approximate straight line at a preset velocity of approximately0.306 m/s when no other behaviors are active.

In spiral mode, various actions can be taken when an obstacle isencountered. For example, the robot could (a) seek to avoid the obstacleand continue the spiral in the counter-clockwise direction, (b) seek toavoid the obstacle and continue the spiral in the opposite direction(e.g. changing from counter-clockwise to clockwise), or (c) changeoperational modes. Continuing the spiral in the opposite direction isknown as reflective spiraling and is represented in FIG. 6C, where therobot 10 reverses its movement path 45 when it comes into contact withobstacle 101. In a preferred embodiment, as detailed in step 220, therobot 10 exits spot cleaning mode upon the first obstacle encountered bya bump sensor 12 or 13.

While a preferred embodiment describes a spiral motion for spotcoverage, any self-bounded area can be used, including but not limitedto regular polygon shapes such as squares, hexagons, ellipses, etc.

Operational Mode: Wall/Obstacle Following

Wall following or, in the case of a cleaning robot, edge cleaning,allows the user to clean only the edges of a room or the edges ofobjects within a room. The user places the robot 10 on the floor near anedge to be cleaned and selects the edge-cleaning operational mode. Therobot 10 then moves in such a way that it follows the edge and cleansall areas brought into contact with the cleaning head 30 of the robot.

The movement of the robot 10 in a room 110 is shown in FIG. 8A, 8B. InFIG. 8A, the robot 10 is placed along wall 100, with the robot'sdominant side next to the wall. The robot then runs along the wallindefinitely following movement path 46. Similarly, in FIG. 8B, therobot 10 is placed in the proximity of an obstacle 101. The robot thenfollows the edge of the obstacle 101 indefinitely following movementpath 47.

In a preferred embodiment, in the wall-following mode, the robot usesthe wall-following sensor 16 to position itself a set distance from thewall. The robot then proceeds to travel along the perimeter of the wall.As shown in FIGS. 8A & 8B, in a preferred embodiment, the robot 10 isnot able to distinguish between a wall 100 and another solid obstacle101.

The method used in a preferred embodiment for following the wall isdetailed in FIG. 9A and provides a smooth wall following operation evenwith a one-bit sensor. (Here the one-bit sensor detects only thepresence or absence of the wall within a particular volume rather thanthe distance between wall and sensor.) Other methods of detecting a wallor object can be used such as bump sensing or sonar sensors.

Once the wall-following operational mode, or WALL FOLLOWING behavior ofa preferred embodiment, is initiated (step 301), the robot first setsits initial value for the steering at r₀. The WALL-FOLLOWING behaviorthen initiates the emit-detect routine in the wall-follower sensor 16(step 310). The existence of a reflection for the IR transmitter portionof the sensor 16 translates into the existence of an object within apredetermined distance from the sensor 16. The WALL-FOLLOWING behaviorthen determines whether there has been a transition from a reflection(object within range) to a non-reflection (object outside of range)(step 320). If there has been a transition (in other words, the wall isnow out of range), the value of r is set to its most negative value andthe robot will veer slightly to the right (step 325). The robot thenbegins the emit-detect sequence again (step 310). If there has not beena transition from a reflection to a non-reflection, the wall-followingbehavior then determines whether there has been a transition fromnon-reflection to reflection (step 330). If there has been such atransition, the value of r is set to its most positive value and therobot will veer slightly left (step 335).

In the absence of either type of transition event, the wall-followingbehavior reduces the absolute value of r (step 340) and begins theemit-detect sequence (step 310) anew. By decreasing the absolute valueof r, the robot 10 begins to turn more sharply in whatever direction itis currently heading. In a preferred embodiment, the rate of decreasingthe absolute value of r is a constant rate dependant on the distancetraveled.

The wall follower mode can be continued for a predetermined or randomtime, a predetermined or random distance or until some additionalcriteria are met (e.g. bump sensor is activated, etc.). In oneembodiment, the robot continues to follow the wall indefinitely. In apreferred embodiment, as shown in FIGS. 8C & 8D wherein referencenumeral 46 identifies the movement of the robot, minimum and maximumtravel distances are determined, whereby the robot will remain inWALL-FOLLOWING behavior until the robot has either traveled the maximumdistance (FIG. 8D) or traveled at least the minimum distance andencountered an obstacle 101 (FIG. 8C). This implementation ofWALL-FOLLOWING behavior ensures the robot spends an appropriate amountof time in WALL-FOLLOWING behavior as compared to its other operationalmodes, thereby decreasing systemic neglect and distributing coverage toall areas. By increasing wall following, the robot is able to move inmore spaces, but the robot is less efficient at cleaning any one space.In addition, by tending to exit WALL-FOLLOWING behavior after obstacledetection, the robot increases its perceived effectiveness.

FIG. 9B is a flow-chart illustration showing this embodiment ofdetermining when to exit WALL-FOLLOWING (WF) behavior. The robot firstdetermines the minimum distance to follow the wall (d_(min)) and themaximum distance to follow the wall (d_(max)). While in wall (orobstacle) following mode, the control system tracks the distance therobot has traveled in that mode (d_(WP)). If d_(WP) is greater thand_(max) (step 350) then the robot exits wall-following mode (step 380).If, however, d_(WP) is less than d_(max) (step 350) and d_(WP) is lessthan d_(min) (step 360), the robot remains in wall-following mode (step385). If d_(WP) is greater than d_(min) (step 360) and an obstacle isencountered (step 370), the robot exits wall-following mode (step 380).

Theoretically, the optimal distance for the robot to travel inWALL-FOLLOWING behavior is a function of room size and configuration androbot size. In a preferred embodiment, the minimum and maximum distancesto remain in WALL-FOLLOWING are set based upon the approximate roomsize, the robots width and a random component, where by the averageminimum travel distance is 2w/p, where w is the width of the workelement of the robot and p is the probability that the robot will enterWALL-FOLLOWING behavior in a given interaction with an obstacle. By wayof example, in a preferred embodiment, w is approximately between 15 cmand 25 cm, and p is 0.095 (where the robot encounters 6 to 15 obstacles,or an average of 10.5 obstacles, before entering an obstacle followingmode). The minimum distance is then set randomly as a distance betweenapproximately 115 cm and 350 cm; the maximum distance is then setrandomly as a distance between approximately 170 cm and 520 cm. Incertain embodiments the ratio between the minimum distance to themaximum distance is 2:3. For the sake of perceived efficiency, therobot's initial operation in a obstacle following mode can be set to belonger than its later operations in obstacle following mode. Inaddition, users may place the robot along the longest wall when startingthe robot, which improves actual as well as perceived coverage.

The distance that the robot travels in wall following mode can also beset by the robot depending on the number and frequency of objectsencountered (as determined by other sensors), which is a measure of room“clutter.” If more objects are encountered, the robot would wall followfor a greater distance in order to get into all the areas of the floor.Conversely, if few obstacles are encountered, the robot would wallfollow less in order to not over-cover the edges of the space in favorof passes through the center of the space. An initial wall-followingdistance can also be included to allow the robot to follow the wall alonger or shorter distance during its initial period where theWALL-FOLLOWING behavior has control.

In a preferred embodiment, the robot may also leave wall-following modeif the robot turns more than, for example, 270 degrees and is unable tolocate the wall or object) or if the robot has turned a total of 360degrees since entering wall-following mode.

In certain embodiments, when the WALL-FOLLOWING behavior is active andthere is a bump, the ALIGN behavior becomes active. The ALIGN behaviorturns the robot counter-clockwise to align the robot with the wall. Therobot always turns a minimum angle to avoid getting the robot gettinginto cycles of many small turns. After it has turned through its minimumangle, the robot monitors its wall sensor and if it detects a wall andthen the wall detection goes away, the robot stops turning. This isbecause at the end of the wall follower range, the robot is well alignedto start WALL-FOLLOWING. If the robot has not seen its wall detector goon and then off by the time it reaches its maximum angle, it stopsanyway. This prevents the robot from turning around in circles when thewall is out of range of its wall sensor. When the most recent bump iswithin the side 60 degrees of the bumper on the dominant side, theminimum angle is set to 14 degrees and the maximum angle is 19 degrees.Otherwise, if the bump is within 30 degrees of the front of the bumperon the dominant side or on the non-dominant side, the minimum angle is20 degrees and the maximum angle is 44 degrees. When the ALIGN behaviorhas completed turning, it cedes control to the WALL-FOLLOWING behavior

Operational Mode: Room Coverage

The third operational mode is here called room-coverage or room cleaningmode, which allows the user to clean any area bounded by walls, stairs,obstacles or other barriers. To exercise this option, the user placesthe robot on the floor and selects room-cleaning mode. The robot themmoves about the room cleaning all areas that it is able to reach.

In a preferred embodiment, the method of performing the room cleaningbehavior is a BOUNCE behavior in combination with the STRAIGHT LINEbehavior. As shown in FIG. 10, the robot 10 travels until a bump sensor12 and/or 13 is activated by contact with an obstacle 101 or a wall 100(see FIG. 11). The robot 10 then turns and continues to travel. A samplemovement path is shown in FIG. 11 as line 48.

The algorithm for random bounce behavior is set forth in FIG. 10. Therobot 10 continues its forward movement (step 401) until a bump sensor12 and/or 13 is activated (step 410). The robot 10 then calculates anacceptable range of new directions based on a determination of whichbump sensor or sensors have been activated (step 420). A determinationis then made with some random calculation to choose the new headingwithin that acceptable range, such as 90 to 270 degrees relative to theobject the robot encountered. The angle of the object the robot hasbumped is determined as described above using the timing between theright and left bump sensors. The robot then turns to its new headings.In a preferred embodiment, the turn is either clockwise orcounterclockwise depending on which direction requires the leastmovement to achieve the new heading. In other embodiments, the turn isaccompanied by movement forward in order to increase the robot'scoverage efficiency.

The statistics of the heading choice made by the robot can bedistributed uniformly across the allowed headings, i.e. there is anequivalent chance for any heading within the acceptable range.Alternately we can choose statistics based on a Gaussian or otherdistribution designed to preferentially drive the robot perpendicularlyaway from a wall.

In other embodiments, the robot could change directions at random orpredetermined times and not based upon external sensor activity.Alternatively, the robot could continuously make small angle correctionsbased on long range sensors to avoid even contacting an object and,thereby cover the surface area with curved paths

In a preferred embodiment, the robot stays in room-cleaning mode until acertain number of bounce interactions are reached, usually between 6 and13.

2. Escape Behaviors

There are several situations the robot may encounter while trying tocover an area that prevent or impede it from covering all of the areaefficiently. A general class of sensors and behaviors called escapebehaviors are designed to get the robot out of these situations, or inextreme cases to shut the robot off if it is determined it cannotescape. In order to decide whether to give an escape behavior priorityamong the various behaviors on the robot, the robot determines thefollowing: (1) is an escape behavior needed; (2) if yes, which escapebehavior is warranted?

By way of example, the following situations illustrate situations wherean escape behavior is needed for an indoor cleaning robot and anappropriate behavior to run:

-   -   (i) Situation 1. The robot detects a situation where it might        get stuck—for example, a high spot in a carpet or near a lamp        base that acts like a ramp for the robot. The robot performs        small “panic” turn behaviors to get out of the situation;    -   (ii) Situation 2. The robot is physically stuck—for example, the        robot is wedged under a couch or against a wall, tangled in        cords or carpet tassels, or stuck on a pile of electrical cords        with its wheels spinning. The robot performs large panic turn        behaviors and turns off relevant motors to escape from the        obstruction;    -   (iii) Situation 3. The robot is in a small, confined area—for        example, the robot is between the legs of a chair or in the open        area under a dresser, or in a small area created by placing a        lamp close to the corner of a room. The robot edge follows using        its bumper and/or performs panic turn behaviors to escape from        the area; and    -   (iv) Situation 4. The robot has been stuck and cannot free        itself—for example, the robot is in one of the cases in category        (ii), above, and has not been able to free itself with any of        its panic behaviors. In this case, the robot stops operation and        signals to the user for help. This preserves battery life and        prevents damage to floors or furniture.

In order to detect the need for each escape situation, various sensorsare used. For example:

-   -   (i) Situation 1. (a) When the brush or side brush current rise        above a threshold, the voltage applied to the relevant motor is        reduced. Whenever this is happening, a stall rate variable is        increased. When the current is below the threshold, the stall        rate is reduced. If the stall level rises above a low threshold        and the slope of the rate is positive, the robot performs small        panic turn behaviors. It only repeats these small panic turn        behaviors when the level has returned to zero and risen to the        threshold again. (b) Likewise, there is a wheel drop level        variable which is increased when a wheel drop event is detected        and is reduced steadily over time. When a wheel drop event is        detected and the wheel drop level is above a threshold (meaning        there have been several wheel drops recently) the robot performs        small or large panic turn behaviors depending on the wheel drop        level.    -   (ii) Situation 2. (a) When the brush stall rate rises above a        high threshold and the slope is positive, the robot turns off        the brush for 13 seconds and performs large panic turn behaviors        at 1, 4, and 7 seconds. At the end of the 13 seconds, the brush        is turned back on. (b) When the drive stall rate rises above a        medium threshold and the slope is positive, the robot performs        large panic turn behaviors continuously. (c) When the drive        stall rate rises above a high threshold, the robot turns off all        of the motors for 15 seconds. At the end of the 15 seconds, the        motors are turned back on. (d) When the bumper of the robot is        held in constantly for 5 seconds (as in a side wedging        situation), the robot performs a large panic turn behavior. It        repeats the panic turn behavior every 5 seconds until the bumper        is released. (e) When the robot has gotten no bumps for a        distance of 20 feet, it assumes that it might be stuck with its        wheels spinning. To free itself, it performs a spiral. If has        still not gotten a bump for 10 feet after the end of the spiral,        performs a large panic turn behavior. It continues this every 10        feet until it gets a bump.    -   (iii) Situation 3. (a) When the average distance between bumps        falls below a low threshold, the robot performs edge following        using its bumper to try to escape from the confined area. (b)        When the average distance between bumps falls below a very low        threshold, the robot performs large panic turn behaviors to        orient it so that it may better be able to escape from the        confined area.    -   (iv) Situation 4. (a) When the brush has stalled and been turned        off several times recently and the brush stall rate is high and        the slope is positive, the robot shuts off. (b) When the drive        has stalled and the motors turned off several times recently and        the drive stall rate is high and the slope is positive, the        robot shuts off. (c) When any of the wheels are dropped        continuously for greater than 2 seconds, the robot shuts        off. (d) When many wheel drop events occur in a short time, the        robot shuts off. (e) When any of the cliff sensors sense a cliff        continuously for 10 seconds, the robot shuts off. (f) When the        bump sensor is constantly depressed for a certain amount of        time, for example 10 seconds, it is likely that the robot is        wedged, and the robot shuts off.

As a descriptive example, FIGS. 12A & 12B illustrate the analysis usedin a preferred embodiment for identifying the need for an escapebehavior relative to a stalled brush motor, as described above inSituations 1, 2 and 4. Each time the brush current exceeds a given limitfor the brush motor (step 402) a rate register is incremented by 1 (step404); if no limit is detected, the rate register is decremented by 1(step 406). A separate slope register stores the recent values for arecent time period, such as 120 cycles. If the rate is above 600 (where600 corresponds to one second of constant stall) (step 414) and theslope is positive (step 416), then the robot will run an escape behavior(step 420) if the escape behavior is enabled (step 418). The escapebehaviors are disabled after running (step 428) until the rate hasreturned to zero (step 422), re-enabled (step 424) and risen to 600again. This is done to avoid the escape behavior being triggeredconstantly at rates above 600.

If, however, the rate is above 2400 (step 410) and the slope is positive(step 412), the robot will run a special set of escape behaviors, shownin FIG. 12B. In a preferred embodiment, the brush motor will shut off(step 430), the “level” is incremented by a predetermined amount (50 to90) (step 430), the stall time is set (step 430), and a panic behavior(step 452) is performed at 1 second (step 445), 4 seconds (step 450) and7 seconds (step 455) since the brush shut off. The control system thenrestarts the brush at 13 seconds (steps 440 & 442). Level is decrementedby 1 every second (steps 444). If level reaches a maximum threshold(step 435), the robot ceases all operation (step 437). In addition, therobot may take additional actions when certain stalls are detected, suchas limiting the voltage to the motor to prevent damage to the motor.

A preferred embodiment of the robot has four escape behaviors: TURN,EDGE, WHEEL DROP and SLOW.

-   -   TURN. The robot turns in place in a random direction, starting        at a higher velocity (approximately twice of its normal turning        velocity) and decreasing to a lower velocity (approximately        one-half of its normal turning velocity). Varying the velocity        may aid the robot in escaping from various situations. The angle        that the robot should turn can be random or a function of the        degree of escape needed or both. In a preferred embodiment, in        low panic situations the robot turns anywhere from 45 to 90        degrees, and in high panic situations the robot turns anywhere        from 90 to 270 degrees.    -   EDGE. The robot follows the edge using its bump sensor until (a)        the robot turns 60 degrees without a bump or (b) the robot        cumulatively has turned more than 170 degrees since the EDGE        behavior initiated. The EDGE behavior may be useful if the        average bump distance is low (but not so low as to cause a panic        behavior). The EDGE behavior allows the robot to fit through the        smallest openings physically possible for the robot and so can        allow the robot to escape from confined areas.    -   WHEEL DROP. The robot back drives wheels briefly, then stops        them. The back driving of the wheels helps to minimize false        positive wheel drops by giving the wheels a small kick in the        opposite direction. If the wheel drop is gone within 2 seconds,        the robot continues normal operation.    -   SLOW. If a wheel drop or a cliff detector goes off, the robot        slows down to speed of 0.235 m/s (or 77% of its normal speed)        for a distance of 0.05 m and then ramps back up to its normal        speed.

In addition to the coverage behaviors and the escape behaviors, therobot also might contain additional behaviors related to safety orusability. For example, if a cliff is detected for more than apredetermined amount of time, the robot may shut off. When a cliff isfirst detected, a cliff avoidance response behavior takes immediateprecedence over all other behaviors, rotating the robot away from thecliff until the robot no longer senses the cliff. In a preferredembodiment, the cliff detection event does not cause a change inoperational modes. In other embodiments, the robot could use analgorithm similar to the wall-following behavior to allow for clifffollowing.

The individual operation of the three operational modes has beendescribed above; we now turn to the preferred mode of switching betweenthe various modes.

In order to achieve the optimal coverage and cleaning efficiency, apreferred embodiment uses a control program that gives priority tovarious coverage behaviors. (Escape behaviors, if needed, are alwaysgiven a higher priority.) For example, the robot 10 may use the wallfollowing mode for a specified or random time period and then switchoperational modes to the room cleaning. By switching between operationalmodes, the robotic device of the present invention is able to increasecoverage, cleaning efficiency and perceived effectiveness.

By way of example, FIGS. 13A & 13B show a mobile robot 10 in a “dogbone” shaped environment in which two rooms 115 & 116 of roughly equaldimensions are connected by a narrow passageway 105. (This exampleillustrates the robot diffusion problem discussed earlier.) Thisarrangement is a simplified version of typical domestic environments,where the “dog bone” may be generated by the arrangements of obstacleswithin the room. In FIG. 13A, the path of robot 10 is traced as line 54as robot 10 operates on in random bounce mode. The robot 10 is unable tomove from room 116 into 115 during the limited run because the robot'srandom behavior did not happen to lead the robot through passageway 105.This method leaves the coverage far less than optimal and the cleaningrate decreased due to the number of times the robot 10 crosses its ownpath.

FIG. 13B shows the movement of a preferred embodiment of robot 10,whereby the robot cycles between BOUNCE and WALL FOLLOWING behaviors. Asthe robot follows path 99, each time the robot 10 encounters a wall 100,the robot follows the wall for a distance equal to twice the robot'sdiameter. The portions of the path 99 in which the robot 10 operates inwall following mode are labeled 51. This method provides greatlyincreased coverage, along with attendant increases in cleaning rate andperceived effectiveness.

Finally, a preferred embodiment of the present invention is detailed inFIG. 14, in which all three operational modes are used. In a preferredembodiment, the device 10 begins in spiral mode (movement line 45). If areflective spiral pattern is used, the device continues in spiral modeuntil a predetermined or random number of reflective events hasoccurred. If a standard spiral is used (as shown in FIG. 14), the deviceshould continue until any bump sensor event. In a preferred embodiment,the device immediately enters wall following mode after the triggeringevent.

In a preferred embodiment, the device then switches between wallfollowing mode (movement lines 51) and random bounce modes (movementlines 48) based on bump sensor events or the completion of the wallfollowing algorithm. In one embodiment, the device does not return tospiral mode; in other embodiments, however, the device can enter spiralmode based on a predetermined or random event.

In a preferred embodiment, the robot keeps a record of the averagedistance traveled between bumps. The robot then calculates an averagebump distance (ABD) using the following formula: (¾×ABD)+(¼×most recentdistance between bumps). If the ABD is a above a predeterminedthreshold, the robot will again give priority to the SPIRAL behavior. Instill other embodiments, the robot may have a minimum number of bumpevents before the SPIRAL behavior will again be given priority. In otherembodiments, the robot may enter SPIRAL behavior if it travels a maximumdistance, for example 20 feet, without a bump event.

In addition, the robot can also have conditions upon which to stop alloperations. For example, for a given room size, which can be manuallyselected, a minimum and maximum run time are set and a minimum totaldistance is selected. When the minimum time and the minimum distancehave been reached the robot shuts off. Likewise, if the maximum time hasbeen reached, the robot shuts off.

Of course, a manual control for selecting between operational modes canalso be used. For example, a remote control could be used to change orinfluence operational modes or behaviors. Likewise, a switch mounted onthe shell itself could be used to set the operation mode or the itchingbetween modes. For instance, a switch could be used to set the level ofclutter in a room to allow the robot a more appropriate coveragealgorithm with limited sensing ability.

One of skill in the art will recognize that portions of the instantinvention can be used in autonomous vehicles for a variety of purposesbesides cleaning. The scope of the invention should be determined by theappended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examplesgiven.

We claim:
 1. A mobile robot comprising: drive wheels operable to movethe robot over a surface; an obstacle detection sensor; and a controlsystem operatively connected to the obstacle detection sensor and to thedrive wheels; wherein said control system is configured to: operate therobot in a plurality of modes including both an obstacle following modein which the robot travels adjacent to an encountered obstacle, and abounce mode in which the robot travels away from an encounteredobstacle; track a frequency of obstacle encounters; and to operate therobot in the obstacle following mode over a distance determined as afunction of the tracked frequency of obstacle encounters.
 2. A mobilerobot according to claim 1, wherein the tactile sensor comprises abumper switch disposed along a forward edge of the robot.
 3. A mobilerobot according to claim 1, wherein the frequency of obstacle encountersis a function of obstacle encounters detected by sensors of the robotother than the obstacle detection sensor.
 4. A mobile robot according toclaim 1, wherein the control system is configured to track the frequencyof obstacle encounters while operating the robot in a mode other thanthe obstacle following mode.
 5. A mobile robot according to claim 1,wherein the control system is configured to switch into the bounce modein response to the robot traveling a predetermined distance withoutencountering an obstacle.
 6. A mobile robot according to claim 5,wherein the predetermined distance is at least 115 centimeters.
 7. Amobile robot according to claim 1, wherein, in the obstacle followingmode, the robot follows the obstacle for a distance at least twice aworking width of the robot.
 8. A mobile robot according to claim 1,wherein the tracked frequency of obstacle encounters is a function ofthe approximate area of the surface.
 9. A mobile robot according toclaim 1, wherein the tracked frequency of obstacle encounters is afunction of time or distance traveled.
 10. A mobile robot according toclaim 1, wherein the control system is configured to switch betweenoperational modes as a function of the tracked frequency of obstacleencounters.
 11. A mobile robot according to claim 1, wherein the controlsystem alternates between operational modes in response to a lack ofsensor input.
 12. A mobile robot according to claim 1, furthercomprising a cliff detector, and wherein the control system isconfigured to reduce velocity of the robot in response to detection of acliff.
 13. A mobile robot according to claim 1, further comprising awheel drop sensor operatively coupled to the control system, and whereinthe control system is configured to operate the robot as a function ofinput from the wheel drop sensor.
 14. A mobile robot according to claim1, wherein the obstacle detection sensor comprises a tactile sensorresponsive to a bump event between the robot and an object.